Saturday night on her Fox News show, Judge Jeanine Piro spoke out with eloquence and righteous indignation over the Benghazi affair. It was a tour de force presentation of the issues in bold and commonsense language. I have always enjoyed Judge Piro's work, but in the past few weeks, she has come into her own. Perhaps it is her years as a judge that enables her to speak with such moral clarity about the fundamental issues. This under-12 minute video segement is a must see. For low information voters, it is a primer on why they should be outraged. Perhaps...

Editor's note: U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz represents Utah's 3rd Congressional District. Washington (CNN) -- In testimony that sharply contradicted the Obama administration's initial narrative of the September 11, 2012, terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, three witnesses shared firsthand accounts this week of what happened before, during and after the attack. The three testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, recounting the horrific events that took the lives of four heroic Americans that day at the U.S. Consulate. Much of what we have known about Benghazi to this point has come from Obama administration sources. The accounts of these...

One of the lead House investigators into the Benghazi terrorist attack called for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to testify before Congress about information provide by State Department whistleblowers, adding that he would support issuing a subpoena if she refuses. “I would hope that she would step up and help us out,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, replied when Charlie Rose asked him if he wants the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to subpoena Clinton. Chaffetz emphasized that the committee is not yet ready to issue such a summons, but noted that “we do have whistleblowers stepping up, [so]...

CIA director David Petraeus was surprised when he read the freshly rewritten talking points an aide had emailed him in the early afternoon of Saturday, September 15. One day earlier, analysts with the CIAÂ’s Office of Terrorism Analysis had drafted a set of unclassified talking points policymakers could use to discuss the attacks in Benghazi, Libya. But this new versionâ€‹Â—â€‹produced with input from senior Obama administration policymakersâ€‹Â—â€‹was a shadow of the original. The original CIA talking points had been blunt: The assault on U.S. facilities in Benghazi was a terrorist attack conducted by a large group of Islamic extremists, including...

(CNSNews.com) -- Elements of the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, the Libyan militia hired by the U.S. State Department to station members as residents inside the U.S. compound in Benghazi and to protect the U.S. diplomats there, were “complicit” in the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack that killed Amb. Chris Stevens and three other Americans, according to the testimony of Greg Hicks, who was the department's second-ranking diplomat in Libya at the time of the attack. “Certainly, elements of that militia were complicit in the attacks,” Greg Hicks, the State Department’s former deputy chief of mission in Libya told the House...

Following on the heels of blockbuster testimony from three whistleblowers regarding the Benghazi terrorist attack, ABC’s Jonathan Karl did some digging into the evolution of the talking points used afterward to paint the attack as a spontaneous demonstration gone wild. The White House claims that the talking points reflected the CIA’s assessment of the situation, but Karl reports that ABC has found twelve revisions made by the Obama administration from the CIA original, culminating in the whitewashed version Susan Rice parroted on September 16th: When it became clear last fall that the CIA’s now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed,...

‘Number one about Cheryl Mills, she is one of the smartest people with the highest standards of integrity that I met at the White House,” says Lanny Davis, the former special counsel to President Clinton, “which is a statement, because there were a lot of smart and a lot of honest people there.” Wednesday’s House Oversight Committee hearing on the Benghazi attack and its aftermath centered unexpectedly on Mills, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s counselor and chief of staff. She is also one of the longest serving, most trusted, and most unflinching members of the former first couple’s inner...

Yesterday was a pretty unbelievable day. The hearing on Benghazi in the House Oversight and Reform committee was compelling and credible. If you didn't get the chance to see it, Greg Hicks' recount of what happened on the night of the attack was riveting, at times spellbinding. Just to re-cap, here are some of the main things we learned from yesterday's hearing. - The YouTube video was a “non-event” in Libya. It was never reported to anyone, even Hillary Clinton herself whom Hicks spoke to at 2am, that there was a protest involved. Perhaps the biggest question remains, who then...

What is Sen. Tom Coburn getting at here? Oklahoma senator Tom Coburn revealed that he believes “the State Department has real trouble” after yesterday’s House Oversight Committee hearing on Benghazi, but said this morning that, at the moment, he can’t reveal why. “Having sat on the Intelligence Committee and seen the review of e-mails that went back and forth as they developed the list, there’s a glaring problem there that will eventually come out — and I can’t talk about it now — but there was an omission that was given to the intelligence committee,” Coburn said on Morning Joe...

Uncle Sam's open support for jihad is an epic scandal that is never even acknowledged. Farenthold [Congressman-Rep-Texas]: "Were you aware of any ties by that militia to Islamic extremists?" Nordstrom: "Absolutely. Yeah, we had that discussion on a number of occasions, the last of which was when there was a Facebook posting of a threat that named Ambassador Stevens and Sen. (John) McCain, who was coming out for the elections. That was in the July (2012) time frame. I met with some of my agents and also some (CIA) annex personnel and we discussed that." More news: Nordstrom seems to...

“Greg, we’re under attack.” Those were the words uttered by Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi when Gregory Hicks, deputy chief of mission in Libya, called him. He didn't say "Greg, there is a large demonstration outside." Gregory Hicks testified that the Libyan president said the attacks were led by Islamic extremists with possible terror ties. The Libyan president didn't say "hey, it was just a demonstration that got outta hand" Gregory Hicks: “The only report that our mission made through every channel was that this was an attack. No protest.” Beth Jones, a high ranking State Department employee, testified that she...

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, called on the president to release interagency emails detailing the response to the attack in Benghazi and the administration's potential role in changing the talking points about the attack "so we can get to the truth of what happened." He also promised "There's going to be more hearings" on the subject. click to watch video.

Let me be 100% clear from the outset. The question I pose is in no way meant to imply or suggest any criticism of Lt.Col. Gibson. I suspect that at some time in the future we will know what he was thinking on that day. Because there are a great many Freepers who are active-duty or retired military, I ask the question because it is both fascinating, and needs to be asked.

Much of the media and liberal establishment simply ignored yesterday's Benghazi hearings. They were content to see, hear, and speak no evil -- which is typically the fastest way to kill a story in Washington. Others framed the proceedings as just another quixotic, partisan effort to hype a long-resolved story. Selling that template requires adherence to two fallacious assertions: First, that no major questions remain regarding the 9/11 terrorist assault on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya -- and second, that no new information emerged from the whistle-blowers' hours-long testimony. The former claim is outright insulting. The latter betrays either...

In the real world, when you cover up four murders after the fact, you likely go to jail. In government, you retire with dignity and run for president with full media support. Up until yesterday, that was the Benghazi scenario following the death of four Americans including our ambassador to Libya. The Obama administration has lied, stonewalled, bullied, and intimidated – the true marks of an open and transparent administration. And, with a few notable exceptions, the American media haven’t just let them get away it. Heck, they’ve helped. Hill testimony of State Department whistleblowers might change that, but it’s...

Gregory Hicks, former deputy chief of mission in Benghazi, told Congress today that a State Department official began criticizing his job performance, and he was ultimately demoted, after he asked why U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice attributed the Benghazi attack to an anti-Islamic Youtube video. “In hindsight, I think it began after I asked the question about Ambassador Rice’s statement on the TV shows,” Hicks said of the criticism during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on the attack today.

Thanks to House Republicans, Americans finally got to hear from the State Department officials the Obama administration never wanted to testify. They are now called “whistleblowers,” but that’s only because their accounts of what really happened in Libya on Sept. 11, 2012, were buried by the administration, apparently in the furtherance of Democrats’ election-year imperatives.Soon after the testimony, Democratic office-holders took to the airwaves and the internet to assure liberal loyalists that there was nothing really “new” here. Republicans, by contrast, trumpeted the accounts of Gregory Hicks, Eric Nordstrom, and Mark Thompson before the House Oversight Committee as proof that...

Not much, if you listen to apologists for the White House and State Department, even after the testimony of two previously-excluded whistleblowers yesterday at a House Oversight Committee hearing on the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans. Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post fact-checker, says that while some of what was said has already come out — somewhat reluctantly — there were in fact some new revelations. And even what we know think as established fact has new angles that carry some big implications.For instance, let’s look at the demonstration run amok vs terrorist attack narrative issue. Kessler points out that...

One question left mainly unaddressed by yesterday’s hearing on Benghazi — and by others, as well — is the lack of preparation by the Obama administration and the US military for the potential for attack in Benghazi. After all, terrorist attacks had been increasing steadily since the fall of the Qaddafi regime in 2011. Other Western nations had already withdrawn from Benghazi due to the security risks in the region, specifically from the radical Islamist terror networks able to operate freely in eastern Libya because of the removal of Qaddafi. Our own State Department personnel in Libya repeatedly warned Washington...